Team against Man Utd

[McGregor]

We've achieved our target with 3 games to spare. We're missing Ballard for those three. Reinildo has been poor lately. Cirkin to start ?

Roefs

Hume
Mukiele
Alderete
Cirkin

Xhaka
Sadiki
Le fee

Talbi
Diarra
Brobbey/Isidor


Diarra was quite wide quite often today I felt and he played well.

 

[Hetty]

Unchanged, Ballard's appeal i think would be successful

 

[chopsfc007]

Unchanged, Ballard's appeal i think would be successful

Why would it be

 

[chunkyshanhawk53]

Unchanged, Ballard's appeal i think would be successful

Martinez wasn’t successful.

 

[McGregor]

Unchanged, Ballard's appeal i think would be successful

It won't be because it's a precedent they've set. A pathetic one at that, but it won't change a thing.

 

[SAFCftm1986]

It won't be because it's a precedent they've set. A pathetic one at that, but it won't change a thing.

This. All players should be getting hair extensions fitted match day next season to even the playing field. Joke

 

[dangermows]

It won't be because it's a precedent they've set. A pathetic one at that, but it won't change a thing.

Because it's clearly accidental would be my thinking v deliberate pulling. I mean I'm not confident but other examples have been much more deliberate.

 

[McGregor]

Because it's clearly accidental would be my thinking v deliberate pulling. I mean I'm not confident but other examples have been much more deliberate.

Yeah I've seen obvious pull backs. This just wasn't one.

 

[dangermows]

Yeah I've seen obvious pull backs. This just wasn't one.

Yep. That's what I was trying to say to challenge your "they've set a precedent" comment, in that this isn't the same as others we've seen. I mean it's probably wishful thinking still but I do think there's a valid reason to review, despite other incidents.

 

[McGregor]

Yep. That's what I was trying to say to challenge your "they've set a precedent" comment, in that this isn't the same as others we've seen. I mean it's probably wishful thinking still but I do think there's a valid reason to review, despite other incidents.

What we see as a valid reason, the FA will see different. Purely because they can't go back on the precedent they've set. It's pretty fucked up we're talking about hair pulls in football, accidental or not. It's even more mental players reactions to the hair pulls.

 

[dangermows]

What we see as a valid reason, the FA will see different. Purely because they can't go back on the precedent they've set. It's pretty fucked up we're talking about hair pulls in football, accidental or not. It's even more mental players reactions to the hair pulls.

But that's my point. They've not set a precedent unless you are aware of incidents that were the same marra. As you've said, others were deliberate/obvious hair pulls.

 

[splorty]

Unchanged, Ballard's appeal i think would be successful

No chance. FA are morons.

 

[Super Colin Todd]

 

[AC Mack]

Fwiw, we achieved our target months ago.

 

[splorty]

Yep. That's what I was trying to say to challenge your "they've set a precedent" comment, in that this isn't the same as others we've seen. I mean it's probably wishful thinking still but I do think there's a valid reason to review, despite other incidents.

It’s worth a try. Nothing to lose.

 

[safcrob]

Would three midfielders do against a decent side who have a decent midfield.

 

[ac999]

I am not so sure Reinildo is fully fit twice hes been subbed, thank god Ballard is suspended otherwise Hume would be in mf, probably still put Rigg on the wing though.

 

[McGregor]

But that's my point. They've not set a precedent unless you are aware of incidents that were the same marra. As you've said, others were deliberate/obvious hair pulls.

Is the precedent clearly not a hair pull is a hair pull and classed as violent conduct.

But then again, that said , ironically Calvert Lewin got away with it and was deemed not to pull on the players hair recently. Was more obvious than Ballard's

 

[dangermows]

Is the precedent clearly not a hair pull is a hair pull and classed as violent conduct.

But then again, that said , ironically Calvert Lewin got away with it and was deemed not to pull on the players hair recently. Was more obvious than Ballard's

My presumption would be a deliberate hair pull. I'd obviously change on that if other obvious accidentals have resulted in a red though. The CL example adds weight to the validity of any appeal.

 

[hoolio]

Diarra for Ballard only change